Although it doesn't prove the existence of an omnipotent, omnicient, omnagapāent personal God,t he following is a scientific proof of supernatural creation, which I find persuasive:
Interesting proof. I find it interesting to question it however.
Scientific Proof of Supernatural Creation
The efficacy of this proof depends upon the following three premises:
1. The Universe is finite. (Note: "Universe" means the total of all matter and energy that exists.)
This is a false premise. The universe is infinite. There is no way anyone can say where it ends or what its boundaries are. If it has any, there would be space beyond the boundary, and matter out beyond somewhere. There's no way to say. The assumption that the universe is a "closed system" is unprovable. There is always something outside any closed system. That "something outside" is as much a part of the "universe" (which means everything) as what is inside.
2. The first law of thermodynamics holds, i.e. , within a closed system matter (and its equivalent, energy) cannot be created nor destroyed.
3. The second law of thermodynamics holds, i.e., the total energy within a closed system is continuously decreasing in its level of availability. In other words, entropy is increasing within any closed system. (Or in layman's terms, the system is "running down").
These laws are highly suspect. First of all, there is no such thing as "matter." Noone has ever seen such a thing. What we know as matter is merely the condition of solidity relative to other solid objects or to space. Who can really say energy can't be created? We have free will; we are creating
something.
Notes on the premises:
1. The first premise in generally accepted within the scientific community. In fact a finite Universe is implied by the widely accepted "big bang" theory. This theory states that all matter and energy existed within a very small volume of space, smaller than a molecule of water, and since that time has been expanding, resulting in the Universe as we know it.
Something had to exist before the big bang. The big bang does not preclude earlier universes, or more distant universes.
2. The first and second laws of thermodynamics are considered to be the most widely‑accepted generalizations known to science.
I understand these generalizations are accepted, but I am skeptical. Life shows an ability to wind up rather than wind down.
The Proof:
1. Since the Universe is finite, it is, itself, a closed system. Thus the first and second laws of thermodynamics apply to it.
2. Either the Universe always existed, or else it came into being (either instantaneously or over a period of time), or it is still coming into being.
3. The idea of the Universe always existing contradicts the third premise. For an infinite amount of time would have passed, plenty of time for entropy to have increased to the extent of inert uniformity. Thus the Universe did not always exist, but had a beginning, or is still coming into being.
4. If the Universe (total of all matter and energy) had a beginning, then its matter and energy couldn't have come into being within itself. For this would contradict premise 2. The same applies if the Universe is still coming into being.
Conclusion: Since the Universe had a beginning, and its matter and energy could not have arisen within itself, then it must have come into it from outside itself, from outside nature itself. That which is outside nature is the Supernatural. Thus the production of matter and energy within the Universe had a Supernatural Source.
The conclusion is based on questionable premises. The universe had no beginning. Eternity is now; there is no other time. Matter doesn't exist as such; it is merely a relative condition. Energy is created all the time, in living or conscious beings. Nature includes all things, so there is nothing outside. Anything that can be created outside nature, can be created within nature. There is no possible boundary between the natural and supernatural. If there is, there can be no connection between them and thus no creation.
The assumptions and premises of physics lead to reductions to absurdity, and thus to their own inadequacy to explain the universe.
